First, a little backstory. Jodi Lomask of Capacitor approached me to make some imagery to be projected during her stage piece called “Synaptic Motion”. Since we were shooting for the performance we decided to make a freestanding video piece that we could show in the lobby after the show and online (and enter into some competitions). The specs for the projection screens had not yet been figured out by the time we needed to shoot so we had to try and cover a few format options. We had the forethought to set a camera overhead and one at ground level. The choreography had been created by Jodi and performed by Michelle Ellis (who would also perform it during the live performance). We spent the afternoon gathering footage of both camera angles. We all went back and fourth about which camera angle would provide the key images for the video.

Then on to editing. Sam Chase, who manned the ground level camera and is also my editor, made a comment after looking at some footage from the overhead cam on set about how it looked so interesting that we didn’t need the ground level footage. The problem was that the ground level footage was also very interesting and had some qualities the overhead footage didn’t have. We decided after one of our typical disagreements/arguments/excuses-not-to-work that we’d make two pieces and see which we liked better. So after rough editing both pieces – still no decision. A little more editing later and both were just looking better on their own. So, purely as an afterthought we said “What’s the harm in having two pieces?” (actually at this point we already had two pieces).

For the performance, footage from the overhead camera was used because the screens that were designed were vertical, and overhead footage works in any orientation. That part of the problem was solved. Still, we didn’t have a clear winner.

2 Comments

Both are excellent. I agree with the premise though that neither is better, they each just offer a different perspective, each with their own unique contribution. Only thing missing to me is the credit for lighting and costume design. Choices in lighting are especially central to the piece and it was sad that the artist has to go uncredited. It may be that the DP is the LD but as this was for live performance I am not so sure there was not the hand of a distinct lighting designer.